This girl was 18 when she started dating the younger girl. The relationship started in November. Hunt turned 18 in August. The victim was 14 the entire time.

The Hunts have purposely spread misinformation regarding the circumstances in order to gain public sympathy and make it appear to the less informed that the situation was ridiculous. The statements they have made regarding the length of the relationship were false, the statements regarding age were false. They manipulated the public to create outcry where there should be none.

The girls started dating in November, and the victims parents were unaware. There was a sexual encounter where Hunt inserted her finger in the victim's vagina in a school bathroom in December, then a similar incident in January. Hunt helped the 14 year old girl run away overnight in January, at this point with full knowledge that the girls parents were not having it. She then had much more, ahem, comprehensive sex with the victim. The parents tried to stop the relationship, but when they found out, through nasty rumours at the school, and the 14 year old upset that she was being leered at by boys and treated like meat by the male students, they called the police. Hunt was arrested by mid February. The victim is a "cooperative complaining witness" and the sheriff and state attorney have made clear that the victim wants the prosecution to move forward, as well as the parents.

She was not expelled from school, which is another misleading statement made by the Hunts. She was moved to the alternative school and will be allowed to walk with her class. Male students in the same situation have been expelled, and students where age was not an issue who've had sex on campus have been expelled as well.

My best friend lives next door to the victim. The girl was well adjusted and fine until this. Now she is in therapy, depressed, acting out, etc.

The law is very clear, she violated it, in more ways than one, and any reasonable person with normal intellectual capabilities would have known that it was wrong. She is lucky she wasn't expelled and that there have been no charges for the interference with the custody of a minor with the runaway issue.

This chick gets no sympathy from me. She effed up, and the play has been to lie to the public to make herself look better.

Oh, and the parents of the victim being motivated by homophobia? That has only come from the Hunts, and they have not exactly proven themselves to be harbingers of truth. And according to people in the know, it has nothing to do with homophobia, it has to do with what their daughter is now going through, and the fact that an 18 year old girl used her for sex and then told the entire school about it.

hardinparamedic:FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal. Letter of the law people are the reason western society is crumbling around the edges. There is no leeway for circumstance. No mercy for petty issues.Making someones way of life illegal simply because they had a birthday and the law says that makes them an adult to me screams ignorance and for the most part indicates a broken legal system.

Somthing similar happened to a friend of mine. He started dating a girl when he was 17 and she was 15. When he turned 19 and the girl was 17 the parents got mad and had him prosecuted. He's still trying to get off the sex offender list. It is bullshiat for him and it's bullshiat for this girl.

Looks like she's going for the gay oppression angle and hoping her cuteness will keep the jury from convicting. If you don't like the law work to get it changed but she did break the law as it stands now and she unfortunately is going to do the time. If this was a 18 year old boy we wouldn't be having this discussion. 2 years house arrest and not having to register as a sex offender is a far king gift that most people in this sotuation don't get offered.

Welcome to equality. I'm not sure why she thinks she should get special treatment because the relationship was of the lesbian variety.

This girl was 18 when she started dating the younger girl. The relationship started in November. Hunt turned 18 in August. The victim was 14 the entire time.

The Hunts have purposely spread misinformation regarding the circumstances in order to gain public sympathy and make it appear to the less informed that the situation was ridiculous. The statements they have made regarding the length of the relationship were false, the statements regarding age were false. They manipulated the public to create outcry where there should be none.

The girls started dating in November, and the victims parents were unaware. There was a sexual encounter where Hunt inserted her finger in the victim's vagina in a school bathroom in December, then a similar incident in January. Hunt helped the 14 year old girl run away overnight in January, at this point with full knowledge that the girls parents were not having it. She then had much more, ahem, comprehensive sex with the victim. The parents tried to stop the relationship, but when they found out, through nasty rumours at the school, and the 14 year old upset that she was being leered at by boys and treated like meat by the male students, they called the police. Hunt was arrested by mid February. The victim is a "cooperative complaining witness" and the sheriff and state attorney have made clear that the victim wants the prosecution to move forward, as well as the parents.

She was not expelled from school, which is another misleading statement made by the Hunts. She was moved to the alternative school and will be allowed to walk with her class. Male students in the same situation have been expelled, and students where age was not an issue who've had sex on campus have been expelled as well.

My best friend lives next door to the victim. The girl was well adjusted and fine until this. Now she is in therapy, depressed, acting out, etc.

The law is very clear, she violated it, in more ways than one, and any ...

This. There were several articles clarifying it recently, because the Hunts had been saying that their daughter was 17 when it started, and according to the police report, she was not -- she was 18 when school started and she met and began the relationship with the 14 year old. There was NEVER a moment in the relationship when it was legal, and if Hunt had been a man, she'd be looking at a hell of a lot worse than that plea deal. It could be that the 14 year old's parents were motivated by homophobia, but since we only have Hunt's parents' words for that, and they've been lying about the girls' ages, I'm not exactly taking that on trust. They're doing a great job spinning it from "Our daughter committed something which is a crime no matter what gender you are" to "Our daughter is being victimized solely because she's a lesbian." `

Here's the thing -- I think the laws on underage sex are overly strict and that having this girl registered as a sex offender would be pointless. However, trying to paint this as a case of "She's being persecuted for being a lesbian" is crazy. A man in her position would get no publicity, no sweet plea deal, and have his life wrecked in no time flat.

studebaker hoch:Ah yes, the awkward years when one of the couple reaches 18 and suddenly BECOMES A FELON if they continue acting like a couple.

Then the other one reaches 18 and all is well on Planet Boink again.

Not so much in this case. The 14 year old is 2 years younger than age of consent. Given the fact that the 14 year old's parents contacted the 18 year old and her parents and asked that the 18 year stay away from their 14 year old -- and then the 18 year old helped the 14 year old to run away -- well, that ratchets everything up. 14 year olds should not be in sexual relationships -- even with other 14 years olds. And their "lovers" sure as hell should not be taking them out their home.

She should have taken the deal. All the prosecution has to do is prove there was sexual contact between the two. As long as the jury doesn't ignore the law, it shouldn't take long to convict.

CSB...

When I was 20 (1994), I lived in Idaho and had sex with a 17-year old I had met earlier that night at a party (turned out 18 was the legal age of consent). Holy shiat... her mom found out about the relationship and wanted the county to hang me out to dry. Luckily, the prosecuting attorney wasn't interested in completely ruining my life, so he offered me a deal. It was still a felony, but he'd recommend probation and I wouldn't have to register as a sex offender. I jumped at it. I ended up on probabtion for a little over a year (they let me off after I paid the fine). Several years afterwards, I petitioned for and was granted and order of dismissal. Whew.

The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

pute kisses like a man:well, it also matters what the law there is regarding young person with young person. most states allow either 3 or 4 year age gaps so it's not child rape for an 18 y/o to be with a 16 y/o. I'm assuming they have 4 year window, it the younger is off by a couple months. sometimes, the law came feel a little arbitrary, when, for example, you either did something totally lawful, or child rape worst felony ever because someone was born on a monday instead of a tuesday.

/ dnrtfa

IIRC from the last thread on this, the Romeo and Juliet statute for their state does not make what they did legal, but it does allow her to petition the court, upon conviction, to keep from having to register as a sex offender.

She's still got a felony conviction for at least 10 years before she can expunge it from her record, if they'll allow it.

AirForceVet:I completely agree with her, her family, friends and supporters that the law is wrong. Being 18, in high school and having sex with a younger peer or classmate is not a crime, IMHO. I know we all agree that someone 18 or older with a limited spread of 4 or 5 years age difference would prevent unnecessary statutory rape cases, as well as not putting non-sex offenders on those stupid websites.

I do think the law is wrong and needs to be written in such a way that it eliminates it's use as a parental revenge tool. I also think that it's wrong that a heterosexual couple involved in this could get married and eliminate the issue, and a homosexual couple could not.

Hey - I am all about equality. If it illegal for heterosexual couples to have a relationship with that age difference (where one side is a minor) why should it be any different for a same sex relationship? (Gal should have taken the plea).

lotus:An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

No.It.Was.Not. 15 and under can never, under any circumstances, consent to sex. The closest you can get is if they are married (at 15) and even that requires adult consent in the form of her parents consenting to the marriage.

TyrantII:hardinparamedic: lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

14-17 legal then vs 15-18 not now. What a difference a year makes (in the eyes of the law)

Word is the parent of the "victim" waited to file charges as soon as the accused was 18.

Jesus christ. READ THE FARKING THREAD. She was NEVER 17. She was always 18. And the charges were filed AFTER she tried to get the 14 year old to run away.

Radioactive Ass:runescorpio: Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal.

Florida age of consent is 16 so no, it was not ever legal.

This, if it were my 14 year old daughter I wouldn't care if it were an 18 year old boy or girl. I don't know if I would press charges (it would depend on a number of variables) but the sex of the other individual wouldn't be a factor.

bulldg4life:I'm not so sure about the stance that "if it were a boy and a girl" there wouldn't be an issue. I mean, an 18yo "boy" would get tried as an adult and be sent to prison for 10-20 years.

The statement was that there wouldn't be any media attention if it were a boy and a girl. She is right, there wouldn't be any Media attention as it's common for statutory rape cases such as this to be ignored by the media because they are fairly common and end up just as you said.

I think that a 2 year house arrest plea was probably the prosecutors office reacting to the media attention. I boy would probably be sent off to prison for a few years and be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Now this young lady will get the same treatment (I hope). Equality not only means that you have the same opportunities as men do but that you also face the same laws and their penalties as men do.

(1)A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.So...as long as they simply say they're not eating each other out, it's...perfectly legal. They can tussle around in bed, make out, do everything...so long as they don't do any carpet munching (or, so long as they say they aren't doing any...). That seems like a pretty easy way to win this, really...as lesbians, they are actually at a bit of an advantage in the situation. Simply going on dates, kissing, making out, that sort of thing? Not illegal.

Based on all the information released, I have. The worst if it to me is the disinformation campaign Kate Hunt's parent's have been spreading. If it was factual, it would be clearly parents attempting to defend their child, but the sheer distortion of it, the callous manipulation, is pretty sickening. If it succeeds, it will be the model for every child molester defense from here on out.

Okay since you seem so well-informed (cough CNN) what lies that can be proven to be lies have been told by the older girls family?

From the Free Kate Change.org petition:My daughter Kaitlyn is a wonderful 18-year-old who is not guilty of anything other than a high school romance, but is being prosecuted for 2 felony counts of "lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12--16 years of age," because she has a girlfriend who is 15. Lie #1 - her victim was 14 at the time

Kailtyn's girlfriend's parents are pressing charges because they are against the same-sex relationship, Lie #2 the Smith's have stated they were opposed to the age difference only even though their daughter has stated that this is a consensual relationship. The two girls began dating while Kaitlyn was 17 Lie #3 the statement clearly shows they met in November 2012 and were dating by around Christmas. Kaitlyn turned 18 in August 2012.but her girlfriend's parents blamed Kailtyn for their daughter's homosexuality. Lie #4 The only "blame" assigned has been for committing sexual battery on their minor daughter They waited until after Kaitlyn turned 18 and went to the police to have charges brought against her. Lie #5 Kaitlyn was already 18 when the relationship started, and they were told twice to keep their daughter from molesting the younger girl

Kaitlyn was a highly respected student at Florida's Sebastian River High School with good grades and participation in cheerleading, basketball and chorus. She was even voted "most school spirit." Now she's been expelled from school Lie #6, Kate was transferred to a different school but not expelled and is facing serious felonies - all because she is in love. If convicted, she could end up in jail or live under house arrest, will have to register as a sex offender, and live her life as a convicted felon.

Our family will do everything we can to stop these people from ruining our daughter's promising life. This is unjust and unfair - and we need your help to stop it.

There's a half-dozen right there. Look back through the thread, every time someone dropped in with some defense of Kate that was factually incorrect, it's been traced back to the Hunt's.

I put it into perspective yet you seem to not understand what it is that you were implying. It must suck to not understand how the real world actually works. Here let me help. 14 year olds (Freshmen) cannot give legal consent to have sex. Ever. Nowhere in the country is this considered legal. Consent starts at 16 and is limited to a specific age range above that age, in the case of Florida it is 16 to 23. Unlimited consent (with some very tight limits) starts at 18 and is completely unfettered at 19. 18 year olds are considered legal adults for most purposes with a few limitations, most notably drinking.

In this case there is a 14 year old minor having sex with an 18 year old where the sex started while the 18 year old was already 18. Two full ages below the age of consent. This wasn't a case of birthdays making it suddenly illegal. It was patently illegal from the start. The 14 year old could not enter any type of legal consensual relationship be it sexual, a credit card or entering into a contract. Straight or gay it was illegal from the start.

Now the 18 year old should have known (the law in general doesn't allow for the "I didn't know that it was illegal" defense unless it's a really obscure law in which case a judge will decide if it's reasonable that the person should have known) that any sexual encounters with a minor may be troublesome (this is in no way obscure). The 18 year old also knew or should have known that the 14 year old was under any legal age of consent. By all accounts she was told this before it went to far by the parents of the 14 year old yet she continued the relationship.

The 18 year old (Hunt) should have taken the plea deal offered. Instead she is getting some very bad advice from the people around her and will (this is an unequivocal prediction) be spending several year behind bars when this is all said and done. Caveat, she at a later time takes the plea deal before it's too late.

Z-clipped:hammer85: Z-clipped: hammer85: Z-clipped: hammer85: Z-clipped: To all of the "law is the law" knuckleheads, I'll say the same thing I said in the last thread:

If you think that a high school student having consensual sex with another high school student warrants a felony conviction for any reason whatsoever, REGARDLESS of their ages, you've either lost all sense of perspective, or you're batshiat crazy.

Z-clipped:hammer85: Z-clipped: hammer85: Z-clipped: To all of the "law is the law" knuckleheads, I'll say the same thing I said in the last thread:

If you think that a high school student having consensual sex with another high school student warrants a felony conviction for any reason whatsoever, REGARDLESS of their ages, you've either lost all sense of perspective, or you're batshiat crazy.

Now lets look at the reasons why:-Age restrictions are arbitrary:Okay then so how do we determine the proper age?

Two main ideas have been proposed:-willing and consentingIf this is true then they are admitting a 45 year old can have sex with a 14 year old

If they argue that 45 is not okay then they have made an arbitrary age limit and break their argument entirely. It also goes the other way, an 8 year old with an 18 year old, why is 8 too low but 14 okay?

-peer groupIf this is the argument how do you define peer group

Lets first discuss time: In this case these girls knew each other for less than a few months before dating, is that adequate time to be "peers"?

Lets say September - November is your limit, when school began and the younger started in high school, so 3 months.

In this any freshman in high school can have sex with anyone from middle school, as they spent the same amount of time before they graduated middle school

If this is not the case, then you are once again setting arbitrary limits and defeat your own argument

Lets figure out WHAT a peer group is.

From wiki "A peer group is both a social group and a primary group of people. Peer group may be defined as a group of people who, through homophily, share similarities such as age, background, and social status. The members of this group are likely to influence the person's beliefs and behaviour.[1] Peer groups contain hierarchies and distinct patterns of behavior."

So lets start with age:

If a 4 year difference is considered a peer group, 14 year olds can now fark 8 year olds, or you have defeated your own argument

Backgrounds:

Can't really comment on this because I don't care to delve into personal lives.

Social status:

Senior and freshman do not overlap, so no go here.

Influential people:

The 18 year old was clearly influential enough to get the 14 year old to run away.

What about parents, teachers, brothers, police, neighbors, Justin beiber? All of these are also influential people, should they be allowed to fark the little girl? If not, then once again you are defeating your own argument by either age or authority.

In summary: if you argue an 18 year old can fark a 14 year old, you're arguing for no limits at all, and child porn should now be legal, else you are just arbitrarily making laws like you are arguing against

Internet Meme Rogers:In the same state we're talking about it is perfectly legal for a 16 year old young woman to go out and have sex with a 52 year old man, but a 14 year old young woman having sex with an 18 year old partner is a felony. If that is not enough of an illustration for anyone as to how goddamn stupid this is, I don't know what else to say to you.

22 , yes, that would be allowed under Florida's close-in-age exception. But 52? No, that is illegal.

This is, bottom line, about one thing: spirit if the law vs. letter of the law. We should always strive to make the two as similar as possible. It's clear that here, the law being broken had little or nothing to do with the reason if the law. And that, ladies and gentlement, is the exact definition of "unjust."

Oh shut the fark up. The law is the law. If a man abuses an underaged girl it's against the law. If a woman ubuses an underaged girl it is still against the law. This biatch is trying to get a special exception because she abused her in a homosexual way. That is a bunch of crap. And anyone who thinks this should get special exception is a tard as well. You aren't above the law for your sexual preferences.

bigwf2007:chatikh: jayphat: dlp211: jayphat: dlp211: BarkingUnicorn: dlp211: You want to prevent your daughter from seeing the other girl fine, but don't go ruining peoples lives because they happened to go to the same school.

And how shall parents prevent kids who attend the same school from seeing each other? Restraining order that forces one girl to switch schools?

So instead let's throw one in jail. If you are that hell bent on being a dick of a parent, figure it out and be a parent, you are just going to destroy your relationship with your kid.

You do realize the 18 got the 14 year old to run away, right? What are you supposed to do at that point but get the law involved?

OMG a 14 year old ran away because that has never happened in the history of teenagers.

A 14 year old ran away with a legal adult and performed sex acts on one another. You don't see a problem there?

Either you're talking about an entirely different case, or a 17-year-old is a legal adult. Because in this case, there was never a time when one girl was 14 and the other was 18. The article is cleverly worded so that people who don't know this story already, like most people commenting on this thread, are getting very confused on the details. The article says the girl was 14 when the relationship started. It doesn't mention that the older girl was 17 at this time. It doesn't mention that the younger girl turned 15 before the older girl turned 18.

Read about this on another site, it's ridiculous how much they leave out. I first read this story on Theblaze.com (Which is highly conservative and has left out details to make things seem worse than they are to their conservative readers) and I still got more details on this story than from this article. The Blaze article also came out before this one, so there's really no excuse.

Here's a quote from Hunt's lawyer to CNN:

"If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn't even be here."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/24/justice/flori ...

Given the text of the law she has been charged under, her lawyer is either an idiot or a liar. Possibly both.

chatikh:Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17. The younger turned 15, then the older turned 18. The parents of the younger girl knew about the relationship before the older girl turned 18, but couldn't stop it so they waited until they could use the law to do it for them. This is something I didn't see on this article, but I've been reading on this before it got onto fark, and I already knew all this from other articles. There is a less than 3 year gap in the relationship that started before the older girl turned 18. Even if it is illegal, it is highly arbitrary.

I have struck out the parts that are untrue. You are going on old (and wrong) information that the mother of the 18 year old was saying in a failed attempt to protect her daughter by spinning it early and often. The police report is available and this is what it says in a nutshell:

The girls were 14 and 18 respectively when they first had any type of sex.There were two separate sexual encounters in a school bathroom involving finger penetration the first one was in late November.The 14 year old was coerced to "Run away" for the night in early January in order to have more "Intimate" relations that included oral sex and a vibrator.The parents of the 14 year old had asked the parents of the 18 year old to step in and break it up at least twice before the running away took place.The police set up a phone call between the two and has the 18 year old on tape admitting to the sexual encounters.The 18 year old was mirandized and admitted to the sexual encounters after that.

At no time was the 18 year old "17" when this started. She turned 18 in August. The mother lied and apparently was trying to spin this as innocent teenagers and then played the gay card (by calling the 14 year olds parents homophobic and fundies) as the reason for the charges even though the 14 year olds parents first tried to settle it early on in the relationship between parents without the law being involved.

The 14yr old girl's parents did the right thing. If I found out my 14 yr old was sexually penetrated by an 18 yr old in the school bathroom I would be more than a little concerned. They did try and resolve the situation without involving the law. However when the adult continued to rape their daughter (statutory rape=rape) then they were forced to act.

The reason a 14yr old isn't capable of consenting to sex is the same reason they can't sign a mortgage or get a credit card etc..For their protection from the unscrupulous.

Puckmarin:I suspect that's based on the statement that she gave police which is much like the statement he defendant gave the cops. They both admitted to having sex with each other. Why shouldn't they? It was consensual. The cops probably lead them to believe that no one would get in trouble if they just told the truth.

It was consensual for the 18 year old, it wasn't consensual for the 14 year old, because legally, 14 year olds cannot give consent. Why is this so hard to understand?

If it's wrong for a male 18+ years old to have sex with 14 year old girls, it's wrong for a woman of 18+ years old to have sex with a 14 year old girl. You don't get an exception because you use your tongue instead of a peener.

dlp211:No because I don't see it that way. I see it as a freshman in HS ran away with a senior in HS and had sex. 14 year olds run away, freshman and seniors have sex, and this stuff has been going on for generations.

And the "15 will get you 20" rule of thumb has also been around for generations. The 18 year olds that you speak of often end up in jail. That's where this girl belongs.

I wish Fark had a "prevent dumbass" feature that would allow us to ask the mods to insert clarifications at the top of the thread, so that morons would see it BEFORE posting stupid crap that has been corrected 5,412 times.

prjindigo:redslippers: bukijin: To all that say that the law is just an arbitrary standard - that's all a law can ever be.

But the intent is simple: a 14 yr old is not capable of consenting to sex with an 18 yr old because of the uneven power dynamic.

Exactly. Perfectly stated.

NO 14 YEAR OLDS HAD SEX WITH 18 YEAR OLDS. Younger turned 15 before older turned 18.Some important things to remember seem to have slipped your ability to read facts.

Funny, because you are incorrect. Like, grossly incorrect. Please read the thread. Read the arrest affidavit. But for G-d's sake, READ before you go acting as if others are dumbasses when you are the one being a dumbass.

MelGoesOnTour:Not sure I see what the big deal here is. To get to my point, I've never seen lesbionic "sex" as really being sex to begin with. Sure, they can vibrate each other and whatnot but, well, it seems pretty innocent. And if there were no "force"issues (I mean, it's not like the older one was 45 and tricking the younger one into something), what's the big deal? And if you're 18 and still in high school you should NOT be treated as an "adult". In other words, it was okay for them to diddle when the older chick was 17-1/2 but when her birthday came all of a sudden things magically changed?! Yeah, yeah, "the law is the law". Well, then, change it (at least when it comes to this sort of situation).

Imagine what the 14 year old is going through at school right now. Imagine how she will be treated for the remainder of high school, by boys and girls alike. Think about how she will have to move to another school district to escape that. And the 18 year old was 18 at the inception of the "relationship".

The law doesn't need to be changed, as there is a major difference in development from 14 to 18. An 18 year old is light years ahead of a 14 year old. I know, I have a 14 year old, and raised my sister from age 12 to 19. If this was my daughter, I'd prosecute as well. It is just not excusable.

And I am from Indian River County. I personally KNOW Brian Workman, the state attorney on this. He'd have filed a No Information in a heartbeat if this situation was truly "harmless", regardless of the parent's demands. My husband practiced law there for years before we moved, and many of my friends are criminal defense attorneys there. I know the judges in town as well; it is a small community, and I am curious to see which one pulls this case.

The general consensus in the legal community is that the girl will quite deservedly get jail time if she doesn't take the plea. And I don't doubt it, as all the judges currently on criminal rotation are not the kind to find the Hunt's misinformation campaign and media shiatstorm charming. They will likely be harder on the girl to make well known that they won't be bullied by poorly executed PR campaigns and mock outrage.

baufan2005:I just don't see how if the girl was 17 and dating for a year it's ok, but as soon as she turns 18 it magically becomes morally wrong. I know the law and all, but it still doesn't make sense.

I just don't see how someone can join a discussion but not be bothered to read the posts up to that point. I know laziness and all but it would prevent some from looking foolish.

If it's illegal for straights, no reason why it shouldn't be for lesbians. The law is the law. I have no problem with two consenting ADULTS wanting to be together, but when you try to be above the law, that's where I draw the line.

Neums:The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

hardinparamedic:FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

Uhhh... I don't have the GoogleFu now, but I saw a report where it *would* be a felony conviction, year of supervised probation, and free rein for the courts to look at her emails and online accounts.

Sorta surprised she rejected it. That deal wouldn't even be on the table for a male in her position. I was already having trouble sussing up sympathy for this girl but that really just does it for me

Has there been any sort of proof that the mother of the 14 year old is truly motivated by homophobia and not just the usual "I don't want my 14 year old having sex" attitude? All I've read is the mother of the 18 year old saying it's because she's a bigot.

hardinparamedic:FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

I completely agree with her, her family, friends and supporters that the law is wrong. Being 18, in high school and having sex with a younger peer or classmate is not a crime, IMHO. I know we all agree that someone 18 or older with a limited spread of 4 or 5 years age difference would prevent unnecessary statutory rape cases, as well as not putting non-sex offenders on those stupid websites.

But, I think they should have taken the plea deal to avoid an awful legal mess.

Xavier99:Hey - I am all about equality. If it illegal for heterosexual couples to have a relationship with that age difference (where one side is a minor) why should it be any different for a same sex relationship? (Gal should have taken the plea).

You know, I'm all in agreeance with you with one caveat. In many states, marriage of the two parties eliminates the possibility of a statutory rape charge.

FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

muck4doo:kazikian: muck4doo: orbister: kazikian: It's not hurtful unless the 14 year old says it is. Not the 14 year old's patents, not her teachers, not the world at large; WHEN. SHE. SAYS. SO. How is this so complicated?

It is complicated for precisely the same reason that consent is complicated. We've just had a couple of groups of men here convicted of grooming, abusing and pimping girls of 11 - 14. In many cases the girls "thought they had a relationship" with their abusers, and were reluctant to help the police.

Don't bother talking to wannabe child molesters.

That's how you know the thread is over.

The thread was over once you and your buddy started defending having sex with 14 year olds.

Don't you see any difference at all between an 18 year old having sex with her teenage girlfriend and a dirty old man raping little kids? Even if you think both cases are wrong, don't you think there should be separate laws in effect for each?

orbister:It is complicated for precisely the same reason that consent is complicated. We've just had a couple of groups of men here convicted of grooming, abusing and pimping girls of 11 - 14. In many cases the girls "thought they had a relationship" with their abusers, and were reluctant to help the police.

And this highlights why there are laws in place to try and prevent such a thing from happening in the first place. It is assumed that until age 16 a minor simply doesn't have the life experience to know what a "Relationship" actually is or what it may entail. For all of their lives pretty much every person in their life that is a few years or more older than them is an authority figure in one form or another. Without the laws we have in place there is no deterrent keeping someone from abusing that authority by the less than scrupulous people amongst us. At 16 the laws allow them to test the waters so to speak but still keeps them pretty much in the shallow end of the pool for a couple of years and helps to prevent most predators from playing in the kiddie pool. By 18 it is assumed that they have at least had the opportunity to learn some more and the laws go away (with a few limited exceptions).

Radioactive Ass:WhippingBoy: Fair enough. My reason for asking is that there's far worse things than this every day, and while this one certainly isn't very nice, it seems to be getting far more attention than it deserves. I'm just trying to figure out why that is.

Because Mother Hunt first presented it to the media as a witch hunt for her daughter because she was gay. The LGBT community and their supporters wholeheartedly took it up as an example of anti-homosexual bias in general. Petitions were started (and garnered at least 50k signatures), Facebook pages and groups were started and so on. Now, as it turns out, Mother Hunt was lying her ass off about most of the facts in the case that she presented and that the petitions and so on were based upon those lies. Instead of bolstering the case concerning anti-gay sentiments, the people who stood behind Mother Hunt now have egg on their faces and it's going to be much harder to make the case concerning anti-gay attitudes as there will always be the underlying question of whether someone is telling the truth or if they are lying to cover their own asses.

In addition we now have people who are still defending the girl because... they think that the age statutes regarding sexual activity amongst teens are too strict, even though most of those age limitations have been around for decades. Most people find that to be juuuust a bit creepy. One individual went so far as to say that he thought that sexual activity between a 30 year old and a 14 year old was "Ok".

That's about it in a nutshell, but I'll add that the Hunts also slandered the family of the victim, which in general pisses a lot of people off, and there are idiots on here arguing simultaneously that 14 year olds are sexual adults, yet 18 year olds aren't mature enough to not stick it in (or lick) jailbait, and that no harm came to the victim and that 14 year olds are peers on equal psychological, emotional and intellectual footing with 18 year olds.

Oh, and that onset of puberty is the defining line of when a child should legally be able to consent to sex, even though the average age of onset of puberty is TEN YEARS OLD.

cbathrob:WhippingBoy: cbathrob: After reading nearly the entire thread, I am forced, reluctantly, to conclude that what Kate did was illegal, that her actions harmed the 14 year-old (who was neither old enough nor mature enough to meaningfully consent), and that she should have taken the plea deal.

Goddam it so much.

Why does this upset you so much?

Because I wish that this was a victimless crime, with no harm done to anyone? Because I wanted to believe the narrative that Kate was being persecuted for being gay rather than rightly charged with being a predetor? Because the truth appears to be messier and grimmer than I want it to be? Because the anti-gay crowd will use this to their advantage? Take your pick. Accepting reality doesn't mean I have to like it.

Yeah, that's part of what gets me angry too. Kate Hunt's sexuality is not some shield to deflect the weight of the law from her, when others in that same position would face worse penalties than she was offered in a deal. Using it as such is demeaning to the LGBT community, utterly manipulative, and likely to provoke a legal backlash. But just like their daughter, other people don't matter to the Hunt's, just their own desires.

desertfool:Also, Boojum2k keeps stating that the 14 year olds parents told Kate TWICE to stop molesting their kid. Where do you get that from?

It's in the CNN interview with them.

desertfool:I think that the 14 year-old is the true lesbian. Kate was just 'experimenting'. When she finally figured out that she could prosecuted she stopped the relationship, then she was entrapped.

You're incredibly wrong, just from the affidavit. She was told to stop, or charges could be brought, then she took the 14 year old into her house overnight and had sex with her while the minors parents weren't aware of her location and thought she'd been kidnapped or something.

Kate Hunt is by all available evidence a predator. The lies her parents have been spreading looks strongly like a smokescreen to cover that up.

cbathrob:After reading nearly the entire thread, I am forced, reluctantly, to conclude that what Kate did was illegal, that her actions harmed the 14 year-old (who was neither old enough nor mature enough to meaningfully consent), and that she should have taken the plea deal.

Goddam it so much.

Since this is the first time you are posting about this subject, I must assume you were leaning towards the "It's just 2 teens" argument before you started reading the thread and have since changed you mind before you posted anything. Good on you. That is a rarity on Fark. So many people came in here with preconceptions and started spouting off, then had to double down on their opinion that was formed by misinformation.

After reading nearly the entire thread, I am forced, reluctantly, to conclude that what Kate did was illegal, that her actions harmed the 14 year-old (who was neither old enough nor mature enough to meaningfully consent), and that she should have taken the plea deal.

MarkEC:FraggleStickCar: I think the idea is that the DA has discretion over what they choose to prosecute (with taxpayer money), and some people would like the collective consciousness to shift such that crimes like this, between two consenting teenagers, are not prosecuted, since locking up this girl (or any other teenager, boy or girl, in the same situation) does nothing to increase public safety, which is arguably the only reason for a criminal justice system.

It's like grandma always said, "the less sexual repression pervading society, the better off we'll all be."

I actually agree with your sentiment. The problem is, this case does not fit your narrative. Kate knew what she was doing was illegal when she was caught and kicked off the basketball team for it. That didn't dissuade her and she aided and abetted the younger girl running away from home and having sex with her again at her house. That is the straw that broke the camels back and caused the whole thing to escalate to criminal charges. When you have a daughter that is 14, you have the right to tell an 18 y/o to stay the fark away from her, and to then press charges when she doesn't.

FraggleStickCar:I think the idea is that the DA has discretion over what they choose to prosecute (with taxpayer money), and some people would like the collective consciousness to shift such that crimes like this, between two consenting teenagers, are not prosecuted, since locking up this girl (or any other teenager, boy or girl, in the same situation) does nothing to increase public safety, which is arguably the only reason for a criminal justice system.

It's like grandma always said, "the less sexual repression pervading society, the better off we'll all be."

I actually agree with your sentiment. The problem is, this case does not fit your narrative. Kate knew what she was doing was illegal when she was caught and kicked off the basketball team for it. That didn't dissuade her and she aided and abetted the younger girl running away from home and having sex with her again at her house. That is the straw that broke the camels back and caused the whole thing to escalate to criminal charges. When you have a daughter that is 14, you have the right to tell an 18 y/o to stay the fark away from her, and to then press charges when she doesn't.

I see that you, too, believe the 18 year girl is a kid and not an adult. That's the whole point of this mess. Thanks for playing.

You do too, seeing as you called her a girl.

Yes, you're spot on...I don't think my position is unclear, though if you didn't read the post from which my original quote was taken, the above reply could be confusing. Both parties are kids, and neither deserves to have their lives farked about like this.

No. One is a kid, and one is an adult.

No, the law defines one as a kid and one as an adult. The law is not reality. The question is whether the law adequately represents reality. Science says it does not. Biology says it does not. Evolution says it does not. Medicine says it does not. Other laws say it does not (legal drinking age, for starters.) Stop being lazy and obtuse.

Stop beating your dead horse. Obeying the law, laws which as a whole society has agreed to abide by, is not being lazy and obtuse.

I'm expecting the Fark Pedobear brigade to set up camp & start singing "We shall overcome" while they display their NAMBLA cards over this shiat.

/Sure, critical thinking is great when it comes to law (we're not talking Justice, but Law)... but the law is there for a decent reason, and getting rid of age of consent is just stupid/creepy. Not sure why people are arguing so harshly over this... the "lust for jailbait" angle makes about as much sense as any.

MarkEC:Holographic Shimmering Pork: MarkEC: Holographic Shimmering Pork: No, the law defines one as a kid and one as an adult. The law is not reality. The question is whether the law adequately represents reality. Science says it does not. Biology says it does not. Evolution says it does not. Medicine says it does not. Other laws say it does not (legal drinking age, for starters.) Stop being lazy and obtuse.

At what age does science say a child should take full responsibility for their life? What age does Evolution say? What age does medicine say? Law says 18. At 18 you can be kick out of the house by your parents and no law is broken. Would anyone really advocate that a parent's legal responsibility to their child should be released at a younger age?

The point I've made is that the law itself is confused on the matter of adulthood, and you've reinforce your absolute argument with examples of that very confusion. The metamorphosis from child into adult is gradual and consists of much more than some abstract "full responsibility" metric. The laws should recognize this.

The laws do recognize it. You can get drivers license and sign a contract at 16 in most states. As parents we give our children more and more freedom as they get older. What you advocate would be far too difficult a task to legislate. As a society we have decided that 18 is the age of majority. Below 18, parents not only have responsibility for their children's welfare, but have rights over what their children do, and not allowing an adult to have sex with them is one we've decided is important enough to pass into law. While I agree a 40 y/o having sex with a 14 y/o is worse and the punishment should be more severe, there must also be a bottom limit to that law. I have yet to see anyone post an alternative to the current law other than "But they're both teenagers!".

I think the idea is that the DA has discretion over what they choose to prosecute (with taxpayer money), and some people would like the collective consciousness to shift such that crimes like this, between two consenting teenagers, are not prosecuted, since locking up this girl (or any other teenager, boy or girl, in the same situation) does nothing to increase public safety, which is arguably the only reason for a criminal justice system.

It's like grandma always said, "the less sexual repression pervading society, the better off we'll all be."

From the previous thread, Kate's Uncle posted on the Free Kate Facebook page:Thank you all for supporting my niece Kate Hunt. As much as we want your support, we also want to keep things accurate and free of exaggeration, even when it engenders sympathy. There has been quite a bit of accidental misinformation spreading around on this page and other sites. This post will hopefully clarify a few things.

First, to be clear, we are not arguing that Kate is being prosecuted by the State of Florida because of her sexual orientation. The law is the law, but the law is unjust. Many 18-year-old men have also been unjustly prosecuted for dating underage girls in their high schools. We are arguing that it is unfair to expect high school students in the same school not to fraternize. It certainly shouldn't be grounds for criminal prosecution.

Second, we do not want to argue that the age difference here is insignificant. The two girls were about 3 years and 7 months apart in age, and Kaitlyn turned 18 in August of last year. Kate, however, is a very small, young-looking senior in high school, and her girlfriend was much taller freshman, older in appearance, an IB student enrolled in courses with upper classmen, and played on the same Varsity basketball team as Kate. They were peers in the same social circle with the same friends. I'm not sure age ever entered into either of their minds. Kate was later kicked off the basketball team for fear that two girls dating each other would cause "drama."

Finally, we've seen many people claim that Kate was arrested the day she turned 18. This is not true. Kate wasn't arrested until February of this year.

That is the rough timeline. We want your support based on the facts involved, not on any false interpretation of those facts. We hope you will continue to help us fight to free Kate and to help us make the laws more just for high school students across America. It would be great if teenagers always thought about the law before they acted on their feelings, but we know this is unrealistic. These issues need to be dealt with between families, not in a court of law.

The Free Kate Facebook page has been changed to a closed group. I can verify I read the above on that page before that change.From that post, the main post(that you can still read), plus the affidavit, the facts that cannot be in dispute are:Kate was 18 in August.They didn't start dating until September.Kate is 3 years and 7 months older, meaning their entire relationship happened when the ages were 18 and 14.Kate's parents knew their 18 y/o was "being intimate" with a 14 y/o.

All the Farkers coming in here using the discredited 17-14 18-15 arguments are speaking from ignorance and should enlighten themselves. The change.org petition site still has the discredited statements by Kate's mother that they started dating when Kate was 17 and that the other girl's parents "waited" till she was 18. That is a bold-faced lie.

Boojum2k:tinfoil-hat maggie: And your proof that it happened that way is because of a cops affidavit, maybe? Thank goodness I've never been lied to or misled by cops before.

Oh for farks sake, did you read the affidavit? It's the girls statements!

It's not a conspiracy to jack up some poor little lesbian girl, it's the last desperate act of parents trying to protect their minor daughter from a predator. They've tried every recourse available, the Hunt's practically kidnapped their daughter in response.

Let's make this purposefully clear, based on the Affidavit: The Hunt girl aided her daughter in running away from home, then had sex with her after her guardians had told her to stay away.

After she decided to tell the entire school what was going on, and get her "love" harassed ruthlessly by everyone.

After she was 18.While the girl was still 14.

Based on the series of events in the Affidavit, she's lucky the DA's only charging her with statutory rape.

Based on all the information released, I have. The worst if it to me is the disinformation campaign Kate Hunt's parent's have been spreading. If it was factual, it would be clearly parents attempting to defend their child, but the sheer distortion of it, the callous manipulation, is pretty sickening. If it succeeds, it will be the model for every child molester defense from here on out.

Okay since you seem so well-informed (cough CNN) what lies that can be proven to be lies have been told by the older girls family?

age, the whole 17 and 15 thing. The "waited till she turned 18 thing." There is zero proof that charges were pressed because of homophobia.

And your proof that it happened that way is because of a cops affidavit, maybe? Thank goodness I've never been lied to or misled by cops before.

doglover:steerforth: I see quite a few people here have never been 14-year-old girls. It is entirely normal for them to experiment with their burgeoning sexuality, usually with themselves or people their own age. It is by no stretch of the imagination unusual for a 14-year-old to play with an older teenager, even one as ancient as, shock horror gosh!, an 18-year-old. I did it myself when I was 15 and in no way was it 'child' abuse. It was interesting and at times fun.

That's the real problem here. No one actually cares about the kid. Everyone just wants to punish a scapegoat. A little high school fling, and one with no pregnancy risk BTW, is never going to be as harmful as your parents having your lover arrested and sent to jail. That girl, and indeed any kid on the receiving end of these laws being abused to punish another kid they care about, is going to be scared for life by the fact her parents did this much more deeply than by anything that happened consensually.

But the 18 year old MUST be punished because someone pulled 18 out of their asshole in some committee meeting once, probably by reading off the bottle of Scotch he was drinking. Imaginary numbers are much more important that real people or society. WE MUST ENFORCE OUR NUMBERS!

Because pregnancy is the only harmful thing that can happen from sex. Right.

You're not even right about the 18 thing. It would have been against the law when Kate was 17, and when she was 16. You don't give a fark about the younger girl, she exists only as part of your fantasy world to you, and her parents must automatically be evil bigots. You and the rest of the Fark Kidfarker Defense Brigade, for whatever reasons you use to justify yourselves, jumped on the bandwagon the Hunt's rolled out, and it's all turned out to be lies. The younger girls parents didn't object to their daughter having a girlfriend, they objected to her having one so far out of her peer group. They objected to Kate Hunt having so much regard for their daughter's feelings that her first sexual experience was in a goddamn school bathroom, such a loving young lady Kate is. They asked Kate's parent's twice to do something about it, they not only refused but it appears they may have been complicit in Kate hiding the girl at their house and having sex with her again. And the girl's parent's object because this did show negative effects with their daughter, it did cause her problems and grief, and was not in her best interests, just Kate getting some younger tail.

The DA offered a deal that would have left Kate off the sex offender registry, kept a felony conviction off her record, and kept her out of prison. That's a pretty good bargain for actually being guilty of those crimes, as she already has admitted.

hardinparamedic:cybrwzrd: am just serving a bit of his own medicine. He called me a pedophile all night for saying this: I don't think the law needs to be involved in a sexual relationship between a 14 and 18 year old. Male or Female, straight or gay.

No. He called you out for attempting to create situational justification for when it would be okay to fark a 14 year old girl.

The fact of the matter is that we, as a society, have deemed this unacceptable due to the damage it can do to the 14 year old, and due to the fact that a 14 year old can be very easily manipulated by the older partner due to their immaturity and development.

You have attempted to argue that some "test" should be applied to each. individual. 14. year. old. girl, and that this as yet undefined, unproven "scientific" test will be able to tell if they're mature enough to consent to sex. That's a ridiculous, absurd argument given the logistics alone, let alone the oversimplification of a topic involving the formation of laws. While yes, a 14 year old girl who grew up on a farm, has been self-sufficient since 8 because Daddy is riding the tractor all day is emotionally different than a 14 year old in the city who has never been by herself, Society as a whole is better served by allowing a law to have mitigating circumstances, than attempting to write an all encompassing exception-to-the-rule law.

In addition to this, you're ignoring the fact that the 14 year old herself is wanting the charges to proceed, not just the parents.

Once again, the idea that society is well served by charging high school seniors with a felony for having consensual sexual contact with freshmen is farking ludicrous.

Boojum2k:Clarification solves the issue. 16 is the age of consent, a 14 year old cannot legally consent to sex. So the law does need to be involved. And for those saying there should be some flexibility given to the law, there is, it is generally up to the parents of the minor to press charges.

Pretty much this.

DAs, generally, have much better things to do than these cases. They turn into he-said, she-said cases. It usually takes a cooperative teenager now-adays to have these things go to court.

The Affidavit linked earlier in the thread pretty much illustrates the 14 year old has suffered harm, and is a willing participant in the criminal case against the 18 year old, who was 18 when the relationship began.

cybrwzrd:am just serving a bit of his own medicine. He called me a pedophile all night for saying this: I don't think the law needs to be involved in a sexual relationship between a 14 and 18 year old. Male or Female, straight or gay.

No. He called you out for attempting to create situational justification for when it would be okay to fark a 14 year old girl.

The fact of the matter is that we, as a society, have deemed this unacceptable due to the damage it can do to the 14 year old, and due to the fact that a 14 year old can be very easily manipulated by the older partner due to their immaturity and development.

You have attempted to argue that some "test" should be applied to each. individual. 14. year. old. girl, and that this as yet undefined, unproven "scientific" test will be able to tell if they're mature enough to consent to sex. That's a ridiculous, absurd argument given the logistics alone, let alone the oversimplification of a topic involving the formation of laws. While yes, a 14 year old girl who grew up on a farm, has been self-sufficient since 8 because Daddy is riding the tractor all day is emotionally different than a 14 year old in the city who has never been by herself, Society as a whole is better served by allowing a law to have mitigating circumstances, than attempting to write an all encompassing exception-to-the-rule law.

In addition to this, you're ignoring the fact that the 14 year old herself is wanting the charges to proceed, not just the parents.

You're accusing someone of having ephebophilic, predatory fantasies of their "teenage daughter's friends" because they called you out over trying to justify making it legal to fark a 14 year old. You then tried to justify it by pretending to know their sexual habits, or lack there-of in high school.

That is the definition of either projection, or being a total troll. Which are you doing skippy?

If you're honestly accusing someone of being a pedophile and/or ephebophile with nothing to prove that, you deserve a kick in the cods (or taco).

Z-clipped:How about you take a step back and consider how utterly stupid a request this is?

I banged your mom when I was 14 and she was 18. That good enough for you?

By the sound of that, I'm willing to bet the only thing you banged at 14 was a crusty tube-sock with the name "Sally Palms" sharpie'd onto the tip.

cybrwzrd:Radioactive Ass: cybrwzrd: Yeah, and you are in the wrong for believing that young adults are incapable of making their own decisions until an arbitrary date.

A 14 year old is in no way a "Young Adult". They are years away from being considered so in any substantive way. 18-21 is a young adult. 21 and beyond is an adult.

Biologically they are. Most humans reach sexual maturity before that even. Even Wikipedia agrees with me here.

"Puberty and therefore biological adulthood generally begins around 10 or 11 years of age for girls and 11 or 12 years of age for boys, though this will vary from person to person"

As a side note - I am in no way advocating sexual abuse of young adults by making this statement - I am just stating facts. Though I am sure you will quickly call me a pedophile for saying that girls as young as 10 or 11 are adults.

Growing hair in places where there wasn't hair before is just one small part of the human body as it matures. Modern science has shown that the brain scans of a 14 year old compared to an 18 year old are decidedly different. We aren't talking about looks but about what you cannot see. Brain development and life experience. Hormones are but a small part of it.

Z-clipped:hammer85: Z-clipped: To all of the "law is the law" knuckleheads, I'll say the same thing I said in the last thread:

If you think that a high school student having consensual sex with another high school student warrants a felony conviction for any reason whatsoever, REGARDLESS of their ages, you've either lost all sense of perspective, or you're batshiat crazy.

muck4doo:When you two stop defending pedophilia, I'll stop blaming you two for defending it.

You are totally incapable of defending any of your points with anything resembling logic and intelligence, aren't you?

Everyone that you are "debating" (I use that term loosely) is saying that teenagers aren't children and shouldn't be treated as such. Likewise, arbitrary age limits based on sex really don't work. None of us are advocating pedophilia, child porn, or anything even close to that.

tinfoil-hat maggie:OgreMagi: Puckmarin: Radioactive Ass: kazikian: No, he said 35 and 19 is ok, which it is.

No he did not. I asked if it was ok for a 30 year old and a 14 year old to have sex. he answered in the affirmative. His current girlfriend is 19 and he is 35. Read it again.

She's not really my "girlfriend" per se, more like a friend with benefits. We're both free to see other people but that's not really important to this discussion.

As someone else put it, my point is that if you're going to give someone control of their sexuality (i.e. it's "OK" for a 14 year old to have sex with another 14 year old) you have to give them complete control over their sexuality. So, if it's OK for them to have sex with someone their own age then it must be OK for them to have sex with someone older.

A 14 year old should not be having sex (boy or girl). How the law handles it when it's two teens versus an adult and a teen is entirely different for good reasons. Teenagers make shiat poor choices. An adult is supposed to know better.

/yes, I know teens want to have sex and fighting nature is difficult

Wait a minute, were you not one of those asking me to "go on" when I said I had sex at 14.I know a few here did and well isn't that asking for child porn?/Just saying//and hell yea, I knew what I was doing back then.

I should clarify. I believe the majority of 14 year olds aren't ready for sex and the potential consequences. Some are. However, the law can't make that distinction, so (as I previously stated) an age of consent is decided upon.

And in the interest of full disclosure, at the age of 14 the ONLY thing I wanted was to touch an actual real live boobie and have sex. That doesn't mean I was ready to knock up a girl and be a daddy.

cybrwzrd:These people seriously think that puberty ends and begins in the split second between 17 and 18 and any sexual activity before then is pedophilia and anyone who says otherwise wants to have sex with infants, since everyone under 18 is still a child.

The law says that. If you want to go down the "Conservative" path then you should know that California state laws are almost exactly the same as Florida's. That state legislature is dominated by "Liberals". Using your logic then the "idiots who are incapable of reason and only blindly follow what their "betters" tell them is right." are also liberals. This is not a right vs. left issue. It's a right vs. wrong issue.

Puckmarin:BarkingUnicorn: Arthur Jumbles: Neums: The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

If they both state that they stopped having sex after Hunt turned 18 because they were fearful of the legal consequences how are they going to prove otherwise?

They both stated that they did have sex after Kaitlyn turned 18.

The absurd thing about this whole case is that they could have legally had sex the night before Kaitlyn's 18th birthday but not the next day.

Internet Meme Rogers:In the same state we're talking about it is perfectly legal for a 16 year old young woman to go out and have sex with a 52 year old man, but a 14 year old young woman having sex with an 18 year old partner is a felony. If that is not enough of an illustration for anyone as to how goddamn stupid this is, I don't know what else to say to you.

16-23 age range not 16-52. 16-52 will get you 20 as well. 18 is the cutoff where everyone is fair game with a few exceptions regarding people in a position of authority over the person aged 18 if they are still in high school (aka teachers farking students), even then 19 years old and the teacher can go to town if they can make it happen in a legal manner (no roofies or things of that nature).

Puckmarin:Radioactive Ass: kazikian: No, he said 35 and 19 is ok, which it is.

No he did not. I asked if it was ok for a 30 year old and a 14 year old to have sex. he answered in the affirmative. His current girlfriend is 19 and he is 35. Read it again.

She's not really my "girlfriend" per se, more like a friend with benefits. We're both free to see other people but that's not really important to this discussion.

As someone else put it, my point is that if you're going to give someone control of their sexuality (i.e. it's "OK" for a 14 year old to have sex with another 14 year old) you have to give them complete control over their sexuality. So, if it's OK for them to have sex with someone their own age then it must be OK for them to have sex with someone older.

A 14 year old should not be having sex (boy or girl). How the law handles it when it's two teens versus an adult and a teen is entirely different for good reasons. Teenagers make shiat poor choices. An adult is supposed to know better.

In the same state we're talking about it is perfectly legal for a 16 year old young woman to go out and have sex with a 52 year old man, but a 14 year old young woman having sex with an 18 year old partner is a felony. If that is not enough of an illustration for anyone as to how goddamn stupid this is, I don't know what else to say to you.

Puckmarin:Radioactive Ass: kazikian: No, he said 35 and 19 is ok, which it is.

No he did not. I asked if it was ok for a 30 year old and a 14 year old to have sex. he answered in the affirmative. His current girlfriend is 19 and he is 35. Read it again.

She's not really my "girlfriend" per se, more like a friend with benefits. We're both free to see other people but that's not really important to this discussion.

As someone else put it, my point is that if you're going to give someone control of their sexuality (i.e. it's "OK" for a 14 year old to have sex with another 14 year old) you have to give them complete control over their sexuality. So, if it's OK for them to have sex with someone their own age then it must be OK for them to have sex with someone older.

How do you feel about child wives, bestiality, and multiple wives? Looks like you are already okay with the child wife thing.

Puckmarin:And this case is essentially about parents wanting to control their kid and as much as I hate to say it, it's probably about parents not wanting to face the fact that their precious snowflake is gay.

I HATE to say this but I do have to wonder if the 14 year old's mom would have called the police had the 18 year old been a guy? It doesn't matter if she's gay or straight, the 18 year old shouldn't be charged with a crime. I'm just saying, I wonder if this would have been a "case" at all had they not been gay.

Apparently the parents of the 14 year old tried to settle this by talking to the other parents first. It's only when that failed did they go to the police. So I'm guessing that gay wasn't really a huge part of it. The mother of the 18 year old is the one who made a big deal out of it after her daughter was arrested. Most of what she has said was refuted by the police report.

Boojum2k:Given the text of the law she has been charged under, her lawyer is either an idiot or a liar. Possibly both.

I'm going with trying to spin the message in a reverse Zimmerman attempt to pressure the DA to not prosecute.

Puckmarin:Brostorm: Puckmarin, the 14 year olds parents gave an interview where they said they would have called the cops if it were a guy. I would find the link but no one in this thread is reading links with pesky things like facts in them anyway

They kinda have to say that though, don't they? Can you imagine the backlash if they had said something different?

Yes, the people with police affidavits and no history of lying are the liars. Ok, cool story.

Puckmarin, the 14 year olds parents gave an interview where they said they would have called the cops if it were a guy. I would find the link but no one in this thread is reading links with pesky things like facts in them anyway

Puckmarin:muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.//Child molesting is child molesting

Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation. The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating. She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."

So I can bang your 13 year old sister as long as she is willing? Everything should be fine if I gave her the Coke and tequila and she wanted it? The funny thing is you will think the stupid things you are posting are still intelligent somehow.

It's interesting that the posters in this thread who are obviously women have related either that they were fully aware, able to, and did consent to sex around the age of 14, or that they felt not ready at that age and chose to wait until they were older. I have yet to see one say they were children incapable of making that decision for themselves.

Puckmarin:muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.//Child molesting is child molesting

Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation. The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating. She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."

Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

Are you farking joking? I began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. I was more than ready for sex when I was 14, which is why I actively went out and got laid on New Year's Eve 1987. I briefly went out with an 18-year-old later that year. He had a cool car but an unfortunate odour problem.

It depends on the 14-year-old. I was ready for experimentation, others weren't. Perhaps this kid was.

Arthur Jumbles:Neums: The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

If they both state that they stopped having sex after Hunt turned 18 because they were fearful of the legal consequences how are they going to prove otherwise?

Because the they first got together when Hunt was already 18. Which has been stated over and over and farking over in this thread.

Puckmarin:redslippers:Uhm, no. Kids that age are not making decisions that would affect the rest of their lives. They chose electives, clothing and hair with guidelines, and sports. Beyond that kids that age make few decisions of consequence because they are children, and anybody who spends 10 minutes with a kid that age would not classify them as anything but children.

Really? So the decision that I made to actually apply myself at school instead of being lazy had no effect on the rest of my life? The hard work that I decided to do had no effect? How about all of the volunteer work that I decided to do? At 14 I knew full well that the decisions I was making would affect the rest of my life.

Following the rules and applying yourself in school, which a lot of kids do, is hardly the same as making adult decisions. It's what kids are expected and taught to do. The ones who do aren't performing above. The ones who don't are performing below. And doing a good high on your Spanish report and eturning your work in on time is hardly comparable to making complex decisions that affect your physical, mental, and emotional well-being.

Puckmarin:BarkingUnicorn: Arthur Jumbles: Neums: The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

If they both state that they stopped having sex after Hunt turned 18 because they were fearful of the legal consequences how are they going to prove otherwise?

They both stated that they did have sex after Kaitlyn turned 18.

The absurd thing about this whole case is that they could have legally had sex the night before Kaitlyn's 18th birthday but not the next day.

Actually second degree felony the night before, third degree felony the night after.

Christian Bale:jayphat: runescorpio: hardinparamedic: FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal. Letter of the law people are the reason western society is crumbling around the edges. There is no leeway for circumstance. No mercy for petty issues.Making someones way of life illegal simply because they had a birthday and the law says that makes them an adult to me screams ignorance and for the most part indicates a broken legal system.

Their relationship never started out as legal ever. She was 18, the other girl was 14. At no point in time was this ever legal.

Except for when she was 17 and the girl was 14.

For farks sake, it was never 17 and 14, and even if it had been, that is also illegal. Under 16 in Florida is a no go, regardless of the age of the partner.

tinfoil-hat maggie:WhippingBoy: tinfoil-hat maggie: WhippingBoy: So if a five year old child (for whatever reason) consents to sex, everything is A-OK!

Oh, man it get's worse than that did you know almost every single newborn was forced to touch a vagina?/Stop being stupid, I know the booze is probably good but, really.

How is this stupid? There's an age of consent for a reason. If someone is under the age of consent, why does it matter how much they are under? I realize that there's a difference between a 5 year old and a 14 year old, but how far back do you go?

Well I wasn't gonna play you're absurd argument, but well a 5 yr old has not sexually developed a 14 yr old has for the most part well at least I was. Granted I didn't make wise or good decisions back then but who does. And it could be argued that I still don't.

So you didn't answer about the booze, what are you drinking? I might need to stay away from it : )

Homemade bourbon.

And sexual development does not equal sexual maturity. I realize the ages are somewhat arbitrary, but I firmly believe that 14 is still a child.

redslippers:kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok, 18-12 not, 22-17 ok, 23-17 no). Or if we were really going to reform the system we might make onset of puberty the cut-off since that's really the defining moment. But how would you go about standardizing that, I dunno. No one wants medical tests to get involved.

You do realize that the onset of puberty can, and is with increasing regularity, as young as 5 or 6, with onset of menses as early as 7 years old?

So no, onset of puberty is in no way a defining hallmark of readiness for sex.

You are all sounding like you want "grass on the field" laws, and that is wrong on a multitude of levels.

13 and 14 year olds are CHILDREN.

Voted for "Smart". I can't believe there are idiots here trying to defend adults having sex with 14 year olds.

kazikian:I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok, 18-12 not, 22-17 ok, 23-17 no). Or if we were really going to reform the system we might make onset of puberty the cut-off since that's really the defining moment. But how would you go about standardizing that, I dunno. No one wants medical tests to get involved.

You do realize that the onset of puberty can, and is with increasing regularity, as young as 5 or 6, with onset of menses as early as 7 years old?

So no, onset of puberty is in no way a defining hallmark of readiness for sex.

You are all sounding like you want "grass on the field" laws, and that is wrong on a multitude of levels.

People arguing that teenagers should be allowed to make their own decisions about sex obviously have never dealt with a teenager and don't remember being one. Few teenagers have developed good decision making skills. Most don't understand that actions can have long term consequences. So we set an age when we call them "adult" and let them sink or swim. We can't create a "maturity test" and have everyone take it each year when they enter high school because the test would be far too subjective. Can you imagine a system where the government has final say on when you are a legal adult? Look up "voting literacy tests" for an example of the type of abuse that would occur.

As for an older man or women getting with a teenager, I can't even imagine the attraction. I can barely stand most women in their twenties and teenagers are quite possibly the most annoying creatures on the face of the planet.

redslippers:cybrwzrd: redslippers:Why? Other than to issue a license to have sex? Do you have no perspective on how stupid and wrong that very premise is?

You want to change the law from protecting children to identifying which ones it would be permissible to diddle?

How on earth is that not disgusting and perverted?

No, I want the law to be changed to not cause stupid situations where an 18, 19, or even 20 year olds will not be prosecuted for having sexual relations with someone from their peer group.

I hate to make an appeal to antiquity here, but hell 4 generations ago no one would have batted an eye at this sort of thing (ignoring than the homosexual nature of it).

I also think that exceptional young adults should be allowed to drink and vote in elections - based on the same reasoning.

So you want to spend millions of dollars so that legal adults won't have to exercise self control?

14 and 18 are NOT close in age. They are not members of the same peer group. Even though they do attend the same school. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

And to what end? So legal adults can act like children and not have to exercise self restraint and respect for others?

Explain to me how they aren't close in age or in the same "peer group." When I was 14 and in high school I had 18 year old friends. We went to the same school, had the same interests, and in some cases even had the same classes. It's been awhile but I clearly remember seniors dating freshmen the whole time I was in HS.

It's a 4 year age difference. Are you trying to tell me that you aren't in the same "peer group" as someone who is 4 years older than you?

Cases like this piss me off because stupid laws are further perverted to punish people who have done nothing wrong. The 18 year old is innocent. She'd be innocent if she was male, female, straight, or gay. She never should have been arrested in the first place as it was clearly consensual sex.

doglover:hammer85: Which as has been posted probably 3 pages worth in this thread, was not the case.

The legal system is broken. Of course the laws on the books aren't ideal. That's why we have trials. Laws suck, people point it out in court, and the courts strike those laws down.

What you have is two teens in the same high school. Close enough. It was legal when they were both underage. It ought to stay legal now. There's people out there right now shooting people down in the streets. That's where the legal system should be focusing its efforts. This? This is between two families. Should not be part of the courts at all.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong. But I believe the parents of the 14-year-old did try to resolve it between the two families. They told the adults parents what was going on and told them to keep her away from their daughter. Instead, she encouraged the girl to run away for more sex. That's when they called the cops.

muck4doo:redslippers: doglover: Brostorm: doglover: redslippers: She was having sex with a very underage girl

Not under any sane legal system.

ok "doglover" sane is subjective.

When something is perfectly legal the year before, it shouldn't magically become illegal the next year just because some subjective age limit was reached. That's why most places have a close age exception if they have age of consent laws.

So, how young is too young? Fourteen is awfully young, and I I find your use of "sane" quite odd. So, should it be 13? 12? 11?

A LOT of 14 year old girls haven't even started their menstrual cycles yet. Think about that.

Amazing isn't it, how many Farkers are all for kids getting sexually exploited.

doglover:hammer85: Which as has been posted probably 3 pages worth in this thread, was not the case.

The legal system is broken. Of course the laws on the books aren't ideal. That's why we have trials. Laws suck, people point it out in court, and the courts strike those laws down.

What you have is two teens in the same high school. Close enough. It was legal when they were both underage. It ought to stay legal now. There's people out there right now shooting people down in the streets. That's where the legal system should be focusing its efforts. This? This is between two families. Should not be part of the courts at all.

Uh...it was never legal, see the 100 or so posts with links to the affadavit or whatever. I know that requires reading which I assume someone who thinks its okay for 18 year olds to fark 14 year olds can't do, but do please try and keep up.

dlp211:hammer85: dlp211: hammer85: dlp211: muck4doo: tinfoil-hat maggie: WhippingBoy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Radioactive Ass: that bosnian sniper: You know, my response -- and the reason I plonked that person -- was over accusing people of being child molesters for saying the context does, and ought to, matter here. But hey, thanks for playing.

When a person repeatedly supports kiddie diddlers then perhaps they are a kiddie diddler as well. By all reputable accounts Hunt is a kiddie diddler as it is well defined by law. You do the math.

No, she's a stupid teen, but really a kiddie diddler?

What would she be if she were an 18 year old guy? Be honest.

A stupid teen, really and I am being honest.

When does the adult age start to you?

When the two wouldn't meet under normal circumstances or the person is an authority figure, eg: a freshman in college and a freshman in HS wouldn't meet and share the same social circles, a substitute teacher and a junior in HS would violate the authority portion. Obviously there are edge cases that would be exceptions which I have partially addressed.

I'm gonna go bang my 12 year old neighbor! We meet under normal circumstances all the time. I'm dumb and can't read well.

FTFY

How so? Your conditions were a) Wouldn't meet under normal circumstances, being a neighbor is a normal one more so than only knowing each other because of a particular sport or because the other is a girl genious and b) an authority figure, which I am not. I am just the friend of the parents.

So, I'm cool right?

I know this hard for you to understand, but again, I am not writing a piece of legislation, I am simply stating how to solve the most obvious case, a freshman and senior relationship. I didn't not define all the rules so you can make up all the hypotheticals you want and no they aren't cool. Jesus you people are dense.

cybrwzrd:Why have we become such prudes as a society? I don't remember this much abuse of statutory rape charges when I was growing up 15 years ago. I dated and slept with plenty of freshmen girls as a Junior and Senior - and I was never their first. I even had a fling over a summer break when I was in college with a girl still in high school who was part of my social group when I was in High School.

Holographic Shimmering Pork:I guess I don't understand the whole situation...starting with the retarded absolutes some farkers love to posit. Two consenting kids farking one another is not rape, statutory or otherwise. While the law may say an 18 year old is an adult, go hang out with one some time - they clearly are not. Also, they go to the same farking high school. HIGH SCHOOL. I am unaware of any actual **adults** attending high school. Those of you yammering your moral outrage remind me of the Harvard homosexuality experiment - the stronger your moral outrage, the more likely you are to need to have a seat with Chris Hanson, right over here.

It can be easily proven the older kid isn't an adult - she still believes in love, and that honesty and good intentions will reign over police and politics. It seems this could have been avoided by complete, pure denial of the alleged sexual encounter; or, better yet, not a word of anything at all. Any attorneys care to chime in regarding a situationof "she said, she said" in a case like this?

And some adults are so immature they might as well be children.

So let's just have some 30 year old farking 15 year olds because hey, same mentality.

And every teacher that ever farked a student should be let off cause SAME HIGH SCHOOL

dlp211:Did I ever claim that any R&J law did? No, I said they should though and they shouldn't be based on age, but by grade.

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? There are some kids who are 12 YO going into high school and there are definitely some 19 year olds in the 12th grade. Using your logic it's OK for a 19 YO to have sex with a 12 YO. Age is used for a reason. The only people who complain about it are members of NAMBLA.

hardinparamedic:And yes, I'm serious. Overt, sexualized behavior in that age group is a major symptom of sexual abuse and /or mental illness in modern western societies.

except when it isn't

I've known several people that have been sexually abused. I've also known several people that have been sexually active in this alleged DANGAH ZONE of age where it's perfectly farkign normal for hormones to rage enough that these kids seek out real satisfaction.

Sometimes sex is just sex. I'm not saying your crusade isn't founded in reality, I'm saying you need to recognize for ever case that fits your rule there are many (quite possibly much more) cases where it's perfectly normal.

But this is America, and sex is never just sex. It's somehow supposed to be some shameful solemn act and if you dare to think otherwise you must be some perverted freak.

4 years is nothing at any point of the scale. When I was 15 I'd take whatever I could get in the sex dept. because that's what me and my body decided we were going to do. I was never abused by any sense of the term.

When I was 15 she was 18 and it was normal and great. When I was 17 and she was 24 it was also a very normal, natural and very very fun relationship. When I was 21 and she was 17 it was as normal as normal can get. Both our parents were apprehensive but neither (both severe sex-scared right wingers, her dad a pastor on top of that) ever even insinuated it was inappropriate because it so obviously wasn't.

The focus in these situations should always be one of examining intent, consent and a mature or at least comprehensive understanding on the part of the younger of the two parties. When I was 15, 16, 17, I knew what the hell I was doing and seeking out and so did all the other kids my age, male or female. And I also knew damn well when I was 13 and 14... I just could never find a willing volunteer. Ruining peoples lives for what is an otherwise normal relationship is such an outrageous injustice to both the people in question and to society as a whole that it should never be diminished or forgotten.

The law isn't good at making smart decisions. It just makes decisions. It's up to us to form it into something intelligent and appropriate.

I like 4 year gap laws (as long as they are within 4 years) but again you'll find cases where even that is too strictly applied to an otherwise natural and normal relationship.

You'll also find cases of inappropriate relationships that fit within the wording of the law. It goes both ways.

I'm not sure why it's such taboo to point out the ages at which we've been naturally procreating for the last few hundred thousand years. Yes, we're more civilized today and yes the intentions of many of our laws are good and right. This will never change the fact that nothing magical happens to you the night you turn 18 and that laws designed by humans will never be successful in forcing nature to conform.

People are going to be attracted to each other, they are going to get it on and it may frequently happen under situations something don't agree with or find distasteful. This doesn't in and of itself make it criminal or some warning flag. No matter how many horror stories you can point to to make your case. At least, it doesn't have to be criminal.

And if we are going to have a crusade to de-sexualize everything under 18... it's time to get rid of the internet. Because if you think exposure and participation in sexual activity is wrong under 18, the only responsible thing a civilized society would do considering the availability/accessibility of porn on the internet is to shut the internet down. I mean, are we or are we not permitting the corruption of an entire generation of youth? Is making those images available any less criminal than flashing a kid? Is it ok because there is that "you must be 18" disclaimer?

Oh, but wait, masturbation and checking out porn are the staples of adolescence... however when one of them gets the wise idea to actually DO it, look out. End of the world. They're obviously sex abused mentally ill perverts and/or victims that are going to infect all the other youth with their sex disease!!

dlp211:redslippers: I'm finding it very interesting how easily it is to discern parents of teenagers from those who are not from the comments. Those without teenagers don't seem to grasp certain aspects of this at all.

Or perhaps some of us don't white wash our high school years and see everything through rose colored glasses. I don't have any teenage daughters but I do have two daughters. I also have a sister-in-law that I have known since she was 9, and she is 16 now who I have spent an immense amount of time around being that my wife's family is Italian.

Until you parent teenagers, or work with them daily, you can't claim to understand them.

I've whitewashed nothing, and you don't know me from Adam, but your supposition that 14 and 18 are not vastly different is stupid.

And up until last November, my older kids WENT TO THE SCHOOL THIS HAPPENED AT.

You are being belligerent. I'm not the only one who disagrees with you. Yet you are getting awfully prickly with me.

And newsflash: while sex happens, there are very few sexually active 14 year olds. Do a little research. I think you'd be surprised.

redslippers:I wish Fark had a "prevent dumbass" feature that would allow us to ask the mods to insert clarifications at the top of the thread, so that morons would see it BEFORE posting stupid crap that has been corrected 5,412 times.

The worst part is that you don't even have to read the first half of the thread to get the facts. The facts are repeated every 20 posts or so. But some people just come in here, don't read anything and drop an opinion like a turd. Thank you for your original post by the way. If even half of that is presented at trial, she should be toast. I still can't believe she didn't take that gift the prosecutor gave her. She looks a lot less sympathetic when you take away the spin.

I'm a big believer in equal rights.... if a 18 year old boy had been having sex with my 14 year old daughter, I'd had pressed charges too. Boy, girl, don't matter, leave your adult hormones away from my underage daughter.

AbbeySomeone:Mock26: hardinparamedic: I also think that it's wrong that a heterosexual couple involved in this could get married and eliminate the issue, and a homosexual couple could not.

Could they, though? The other girl is only 15.

Florida just needs to legalize gay marriage.

The lives of both of these girls have been ruined by what should have been a private matter. The younger one will be harrassed by her peers and bullied on the likes of FB, Ms. Hunt will be destroyed by predatorial dykes in the slammer. FAIL all around.

The other girl is 14. Even in states where marriage by teens is legal, 14 year olds are to young to marry without parental consent. Good lord this has nothing to do with farking gay marriage (which I support). This has everything to do with an 18 yo. Finger banging a 14 yo in a school bathroom and later getting her to run away to have sex.

AbbeySomeone:Why did she admit anything to the police? If the phone was recorded she should have remained silent until she had a lawyer.Also, why is an 18 year old just entering freshman year?

It happens sometimes. I turned 18 October of my senior year, there were people older then me. there was even a 19 year old. Laws with regard to at what age a child starts kindergarten differ and can sometimes cause a delay or force a child to be left back.

Now, if this was an 18 year old boy and a 14 year old girl, people would be up in arms.

Gays want the same rights as everyone else including to marry. You have to abide by the same laws and be prosecuted under those same laws as anybody else. This makes her a child molester, and to be put on the sex offender registry period. Just because you're gay doesn't mean you can hide behind it like a shield too. Suck it up and go to jail pervert.

hardinparamedic:lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

That's about all they can hope for. I loved this part:FTA: "It's a situation of two teenagers who happen to be of the same sex involved in a relationship. If this case involved a boy and a girl, we don't believe there'd be the media attention to this case.

Darn right there wouldn't. If it was an 18yo guy, he's be in jail+perm sex offender.

bugontherug:redslippers: But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.

Very well said. How on earth did the human race even get to this point, what with all the predatory, exploitative teen-on-teen sex going on before the advent of modern statutory rape laws?

England's first statutory rape law was passed in 1275. It set the age of consent at 12. No close in age stuff. A 40 year old man could bonk a 12 year old if he wanted.

But they soon realized their mistake. So in 1576, parliament voted to change the age of consent--to 10.

The vast majority of these situations are predatory

1) What do you mean by "predatory?"

2) How do you know the vast majority of 18 year olds dating 14 year olds situations are predatory?

Laws on the books several hundred years ago are hardly comparable to modern society. That was not exactly known as an enlightened time, nor were life spans long enough to wait until your 20s or 30s to marry or procreate.

As far as "predatory" I mean that the relationship is unequal. The younger is at a significant psychological, intellectual, and emotional disadvantage. Therefore, the sexual relationship is predatory, as while the older party is old enough to understand ramifications and make sound decisions, the younger party is not. This is the very reason that a minor cannot enter into a contract. Because the contract would be at it's very nature predatory, sue to the power imbalance. I do not mean that all teenagers who've ever wanted to tap the ass of a younger teenager are predators. But the relationship is predatory.

And how do I know? Because 14 year olds and 18 year olds, when when comparing the ability to make decisions, think about long term as well as short term consequences, etc., you may as well be comparing apes to humans. How is this so hard to comprehend? Let me guess, you've never parented a teenager, have you?

I disagree. It is far from common. It does happen, and when it does, you usually have a younger senior and an older freshman.

These two met in September. They relationship began in November. That is not long enough to be an established part of a peer group. The definition of peer group is as follows:

peer′ group`n.a group of friends or associates, usu. of similar background, social status, and esp. age, who are likely to influence a person's beliefs and behavior. My kids are in a small school, where the kindergartners are housed in the same building as the highschoolers. The older kids and the younger kids all know each other, they pass each other in hallways, they even occasionally share an elective (4-H, agriculture studies, chorus, band, drama, all grouped by interest and ability rather than age). By your definition, my kindergartner belongs to the same peer group as my 14 year old, because they attend school in the same building and have the occasional overlap in chorus and 4-H. That argument is ludicrous.

14 year olds and 18 year olds do not belong to the same peer group. With teenagers, an age difference of just six months can be a massive difference. The brain development of a 14 year old does not even compare to the brain development of an 18 year old.

But that is okay, keep clinging to your ridiculous claim that because they saw each other at basket ball practice, the 14 year old was on equal footing with an 18 year old.

redslippers:dlp211: redslippers: dlp211: This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships. Girl shouldn't be charged with anything. If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything. Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Seniors do not date freshman "all the time". And yes, there should be laws on the books to prevent older, more mature kids from having sexual encounters with kids who are not old enough to drive a car, let alone determine whether or not they are ready to have sex.

When is the last time you had a conversation with a fourteen year old girl? My daughter is very mature for her age. She gets good grades, talks to me about things going on socially, boys, even told me openly that she is a little confused about her sexuality and thinks she may be a lesbian. She is incredibly smart, and for her age, very well reasoned. But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but seniors date freshman all the time, more specifically, senior boys date freshman girls, and this isn't even new, this has been going on since at least my grandparents generation. This wasn't someone in college dating a freshman in high school. This was a senior dating a freshman. They were a part of the same peer group.

They were not "part of the same peer group". How much time have you spent around teenagers lately? How much time immersed in a high school? It is scandalous for a senior to date a freshman. These girls were not buddies all along, they JUST MET. Seniors and freshmen do not share classes, they do not haunt the same social circles, ...

They played on the same basketball team. There are in fact classes where there are seniors and freshman together, they are called electives. I spend a fair amount of time around teenagers considering that my sister in law is 16 now and I have known her she was 9, plus all her friends. It is far from "scandalous" for a senior to date a freshman. Again, the law with regard to these kinds of situations is stupid.

I can only hope that this goes to trial and that she not only gets convicted but receives a very hefty sentence that not only includes jail time but also her name on a sex offender registry.

Why?

Because if the situation involved a 18 year old guy and a 14 year old girl most people, especially feminists, would be screaming statutory rape. Instead, because this is a "lesibian relationship" everyone is treating the rapist like some sort of hero...

Sigh, at this point I have to agree with those who say prosecute. But the age thing is an issue mostly because, as others pointed out, maturity does not magically appear overnight with a change of age.

The law needs to be more flexible. But in this case? I actually think the 18 year old knew better. But was blinded by the stupidity of youth.

dlp211:redslippers: dlp211: This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships. Girl shouldn't be charged with anything. If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything. Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Seniors do not date freshman "all the time". And yes, there should be laws on the books to prevent older, more mature kids from having sexual encounters with kids who are not old enough to drive a car, let alone determine whether or not they are ready to have sex.

When is the last time you had a conversation with a fourteen year old girl? My daughter is very mature for her age. She gets good grades, talks to me about things going on socially, boys, even told me openly that she is a little confused about her sexuality and thinks she may be a lesbian. She is incredibly smart, and for her age, very well reasoned. But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but seniors date freshman all the time, more specifically, senior boys date freshman girls, and this isn't even new, this has been going on since at least my grandparents generation. This wasn't someone in college dating a freshman in high school. This was a senior dating a freshman. They were a part of the same peer group.

They were not "part of the same peer group". How much time have you spent around teenagers lately? How much time immersed in a high school? It is scandalous for a senior to date a freshman. These girls were not buddies all along, they JUST MET. Seniors and freshmen do not share classes, they do not haunt the same social circles, they are not "peers". Seniors and Juniors, that argument holds valid. Juniors and sophomores, there is overlap. Sophomores and freshmen, some overlap. And there is the occasional senior dating an older sophomore.

This was an 18 year old legal adult, dating a 14 year old child. A girl old enough to buy a car, or a house, vote, work, leave the country of her own volition, live alone, get married, join the military, and go to college, dating a girl FRESH OUT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL. A girl who is not old enough to drive, or even have a bank account without her parent's name on it.

redslippers:dlp211: This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships. Girl shouldn't be charged with anything. If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything. Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Seniors do not date freshman "all the time". And yes, there should be laws on the books to prevent older, more mature kids from having sexual encounters with kids who are not old enough to drive a car, let alone determine whether or not they are ready to have sex.

When is the last time you had a conversation with a fourteen year old girl? My daughter is very mature for her age. She gets good grades, talks to me about things going on socially, boys, even told me openly that she is a little confused about her sexuality and thinks she may be a lesbian. She is incredibly smart, and for her age, very well reasoned. But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but seniors date freshman all the time, more specifically, senior boys date freshman girls, and this isn't even new, this has been going on since at least my grandparents generation. This wasn't someone in college dating a freshman in high school. This was a senior dating a freshman. They were a part of the same peer group.

Tommy Moo:redslippers: bukijin: To all that say that the law is just an arbitrary standard - that's all a law can ever be.

But the intent is simple: a 14 yr old is not capable of consenting to sex with an 18 yr old because of the uneven power dynamic.

Exactly. Perfectly stated.

I don't know. The problem with the law is that there's no grey area, but in the real world there is. There are age gaps where it starts to get kinda creepy and maybe sorta inappropriate, but to the law, you are either guilty as sin or pure as the driven snow. Over 20 with a 14 year old and I'd say lock her up, and I'd dare anyone to try to make it about homophobia. But at the same time, if this was 17/14 I don't think anyone would care. The power balance in their relationship didn't suddenly, dramatically shift on the day this girl turned 18.

That is where parenting comes in. The law has to delineate something, and this is a hell of a sight better than an unenforceable law on the books that reads "If everybody is creeped out, it's illegal". Or that leaves prosecution solely up to the discretion of the parents.

The law in Florida us clear that under 18 is jail bait. And if you are under a specific age, under 16 is jail bait. All teenagers know this law. In Indian River, it is actually taught in health class.

This law stands to protect kids with parents who don't care enough to, as well as provide teeth for parents to protect their children.

And you'd be hard pressed to find a parent of a fourteen year old girl who thinks this is "no big deal".

dlp211:This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships. Girl shouldn't be charged with anything. If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything. Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Seniors do not date freshman "all the time". And yes, there should be laws on the books to prevent older, more mature kids from having sexual encounters with kids who are not old enough to drive a car, let alone determine whether or not they are ready to have sex.

When is the last time you had a conversation with a fourteen year old girl? My daughter is very mature for her age. She gets good grades, talks to me about things going on socially, boys, even told me openly that she is a little confused about her sexuality and thinks she may be a lesbian. She is incredibly smart, and for her age, very well reasoned. But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.

This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships. Girl shouldn't be charged with anything. If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything. Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Ah, fark TFA. Kaitlyn is not charged with "child abuse" as it says. She's charged with two counts of "lewd or lascivious molestation" against a child age 12 to 16. They've got her.

LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION.-

(a)A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.....

2.An offender 18 years of age or older who commits lewd or lascivious molestation against a victim 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

jst3p:baufan2005: I just don't see how if the girl was 17 and dating for a year it's ok, but as soon as she turns 18 it magically becomes morally wrong. I know the law and all, but it still doesn't make sense.

I just don't see how someone can join a discussion but not be bothered to read the posts up to that point. I know laziness and all but it would prevent some from looking foolish.

baufan2005:I just don't see how if the girl was 17 and dating for a year it's ok, but as soon as she turns 18 it magically becomes morally wrong. I know the law and all, but it still doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make any sense because that's not what happened. Not at all.

RenownedCurator:TyrantII: hardinparamedic: lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

14-17 legal then vs 15-18 not now. What a difference a year makes (in the eyes of the law)

Word is the parent of the "victim" waited to file charges as soon as the accused was 18.

"Word" is wrong. If you read the affidavit, the girls weren't even involved when the accused turned 18. She was 18 1/2 when arrested.

It's amazing to me that, and not just in this case, people will form an opinion based on early information. Then when that information is later proven to be inaccurate, they not only refuse to reconsider their opinion but refuse to accept the new information.

Actually, it amazes many that anyone accepts that the early information on any crime or natural disaster or accident is accurate, especially when one side is trying to spin it. By now everyone should know that the early accounts will almost inevitably prove to be inaccurate of not flat out wrong.

I'd have no problem with parents playing the "This state has shiatty consent gap laws", which is where even if 16 is the age of consent, that say 15 on 17 isn't stat rape due to the nearness in age. Of course that doesn't appear to apply in this case since it started out 18 on 14. At that point, the older girl was a dummy and should have just kept her tongue out of the other girl's pants. Wait a few more months for college and have all the sex you want.

I find myself in an odd position. I dislike the whole scarlet letter sex offender thing, but I also dislike how Hunt and her family are trying to play "It's only because I'm a lesbian." That's bullshiat, if it was an 18 year old guy he'd have the book thrown at him and the really extreme folk would be calling for chemical castration or something else.

At the end of the day, any set of teenagers needs to grasp that when one person is checking out of highschool and the other person is just checking in, it is a bad idea. Go download some porn or something.

hardinparamedic:lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

Personally, I don't care of they were gay or not. Unless the DA can prove without a doubt that the younger party was coerced or in some way manipulated into the relationship, these two kids should get a stern ass kicking from their parents, and grounded for a while.

This "0 tolerance", black and white interpretation of teen relationships has done more damage to the effectiveness and legitimacy of sex offender laws than anything else.

Not sure I see what the big deal here is. To get to my point, I've never seen lesbionic "sex" as really being sex to begin with. Sure, they can vibrate each other and whatnot but, well, it seems pretty innocent. And if there were no "force"issues (I mean, it's not like the older one was 45 and tricking the younger one into something), what's the big deal? And if you're 18 and still in high school you should NOT be treated as an "adult". In other words, it was okay for them to diddle when the older chick was 17-1/2 but when her birthday came all of a sudden things magically changed?! Yeah, yeah, "the law is the law". Well, then, change it (at least when it comes to this sort of situation).

Radioactive Ass:bulldg4life: I'm not so sure about the stance that "if it were a boy and a girl" there wouldn't be an issue. I mean, an 18yo "boy" would get tried as an adult and be sent to prison for 10-20 years.

The statement was that there wouldn't be any media attention if it were a boy and a girl. She is right, there wouldn't be any Media attention as it's common for statutory rape cases such as this to be ignored by the media because they are fairly common and end up just as you said.

I think that a 2 year house arrest plea was probably the prosecutors office reacting to the media attention. I boy would probably be sent off to prison for a few years and be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Now this young lady will get the same treatment (I hope). Equality not only means that you have the same opportunities as men do but that you also face the same laws and their penalties as men do.

Yep, if that were my 18 year old son or daughter and they got that offer I would be pushing them to sign on the dotted line ASAP.

A Shambling Mound:It seemed like a very generous deal. I understand she would reject any deal if she believes she'll be better off going to trial but is it wrong to assume that if the trial does not go her way she is going to be genuinely f*cked?

I'm guessing they gave her such a generous deal because they didn't want to go to trial in the first place. Especially with what is going on right now with homosexual rights and how much of a hot topic it is in the national news.

Neums:The relationship had been going on for some time, when they were 14 and 17. The parents of the then-14-year-old waited until the day Hunt turned 18 to file charges. From what I've read, they're religious, blamed Hunt for coercing and turning their child gay, and planned for the birthday to punish them. But can they prove that they were together once Hunt turned 18? Seems to me that Hunt and the girlfriend could have decided to cool thing down until the girlfriend became legal. If all the activity happened prior to Hunt turning 18, then it's not statutory rape, is it?

No it didn't and no they didn't. Go reread the facts of this case please, then comment.

Hey at least she wasn't in Illinois, where we had it drummed into our heads in high school that two 17 year olds having sex were by definition raping each other, and both could go to jail for a very long time if the parents had problems with the relationship.

/have they changed that law since '93 when I moved out?//In Indiana it was two years before I found someone who could tell me what the age of consent in that state was, everyone thought I was an idiot for asking. Spent two years carding every date I had just to make sure.///had a mother literally offer me the choice between her 17 year old daughter and her 14 year old daughter, because she figured I was going to college and could support one of her children easily. Declined offer. WTF.

I don't see any problem here. The older female is 18. The younger is 14. If you're 18 or older in the U.S. sex with someone under 18 is a crime. The law does not recognize any difference between homosexual and heterosexual contact.

It's true some states allow homosexuals to marry. Most if not all states makes an exception for 18 year olds having sex with someone younger if the two are married. Still in most, if not all states a 14 year old is too young to marry without the parents permission.

This sounds to me like yet another case of somebody crying over the possibility their little snowflake might end up in prison for committing a crime.

runescorpio:hardinparamedic: FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal. Letter of the law people are the reason western society is crumbling around the edges. There is no leeway for circumstance. No mercy for petty issues.Making someones way of life illegal simply because they had a birthday and the law says that makes them an adult to me screams ignorance and for the most part indicates a broken legal system.

Their relationship never started out as legal ever. She was 18, the other girl was 14. At no point in time was this ever legal.

A Shambling Mound:As with the one that put her in this position in the first place, she is going to regret that decision.

Plea deals for that sort of thing don't get any better. Now they're going to hang her out to dry.

You need to put the TV remote down there, CSI.

tblax:Sorta surprised she rejected it. That deal wouldn't even be on the table for a male in her position. I was already having trouble sussing up sympathy for this girl but that really just does it for me

Has there been any sort of proof that the mother of the 14 year old is truly motivated by homophobia and not just the usual "I don't want my 14 year old having sex" attitude? All I've read is the mother of the 18 year old saying it's because she's a bigot.

Good question. And the plea deal will involve sex offender lists and the felony conviction, so that earlier comment by someone else is out. This wreaks of homosympathy spin. And I fear if the perpetrator gets a pass it will open up a door for others to get off. Even if the parents are homophobic, that disability is secondary to the question did a rape occur. I submit with all the progress we have made we don't need to scrutinize victims because of how she dressed, flirted, etc because she is homosexual. This victim deserves equal protection under the law.

tblax:Sorta surprised she rejected it. That deal wouldn't even be on the table for a male in her position. I was already having trouble sussing up sympathy for this girl but that really just does it for me

Has there been any sort of proof that the mother of the 14 year old is truly motivated by homophobia and not just the usual "I don't want my 14 year old having sex" attitude? All I've read is the mother of the 18 year old saying it's because she's a bigot.

In this case, it doesn't really matter. My understanding is that, at least in Florida (where this took place), statutory rape is a strict liability crime. There's no affirmative defense about "her parents just hate me" or "I thought she was eighteen" available - if you fark, you're farked. In Florida, the age of consent is 18, or 16 if with a person not older than 23. Fourteen is right out.

Mugato:And I was of course called an asshole. Which I am of course but I was called an asshole for not calling it a homophobia issue. This was before I called the situation totally hot but that's besides the point.

The issue is that by calling it a homophobia issue, the parents are able to tap into some deep issues going on in American Culture today.

There was another thread on this and I said in that thread that the law is the law, whether it's fair or not and guys in the same situation have frequently been more harshly convicted and sentenced for the same thing. And I was of course called an asshole. Which I am of course but I was called an asshole for not calling it a homophobia issue. This was before I called the situation totally hot but that's besides the point.

runescorpio:Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal.

Look. Look. I know what you're saying here, and I generally agree with you, but the relationship was never "legal" to begin with. The girl was 14, and the other girl was 17. Florida only recognizes a two year age difference for consensual relationships before the age of majority, IIRC.

hardinparamedic:I also think that it's wrong that a heterosexual couple involved in this could get married and eliminate the issue, and a homosexual couple could not.

What if the state requires parental permission due to the age of the girl? If the parents don't want them to date and would press Statutory Rape charges what are the odds that they'll give permission to marry?

hardinparamedic:lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Apparently the parents of the 18 year old are trying to turn this into a case of judicial revenge because the 14 year old was involved with someone of the same sex, rather than the fact it was someone of age with someone very much not of age of consent.

The hope is that by going for the bigotry/discrimination angle, they can get public and popular opinion to either pressure the DA into dropping the charges, or influence the jury not to convict.

So these parents don't like the lesbian angle. Some other girl's parents don't like the boyfriend because he's not Jewish. Some other girl's parents don't like the fact that the guy was black. Some other girl's parents don't like the bf/gf because they are poor.

heidinoele:Somthing similar happened to a friend of mine. He started dating a girl when he was 17 and she was 15. When he turned 19 and the girl was 17 the parents got mad and had him prosecuted. He's still trying to get off the sex offender list. It is bullshiat for him and it's bullshiat for this girl.

There was a similar case here in California. Guy turned 18, his girlfriend was a year younger. The father pressed charges. Normally the police would have not bothered, but in this case the father was a cop, so his buddy network took care of things.

Last I heard, the couple is now married with a baby. The guy is stuck on the sex offender's list so his job prospects are severely limited. I doubt they have any interaction with daddy dearest.

hardinparamedic:FTFA: By accepting the plea deal, Hunt would have been placed on house arrest for two years.

House arrest for two years, no felony conviction, and no requirement to register as a sex offender? I understand the want to fight for a statement, but I have to say that in that position, I might just take the deal.

It's still on her criminal record, which affects her ability to gain employment (and possibly adopt kids). Also, doesn't house arrest affect your ability to go to college?

In any case, it's in the news now, so anytime someone googles her name for such things, it's going to pop up. So I'd probably want to take the plea deal anyway.

Xavier99:Hey - I am all about equality. If it illegal for heterosexual couples to have a relationship with that age difference (where one side is a minor) why should it be any different for a same sex relationship? (Gal should have taken the plea).

Ditto. That's how I feel as well. That was a pretty damn good plea deal.